Why Presbyterians baptize infants -- a concise yet extremely convincing 6-minute explanation by Jonny Gibson!

"extremely convincing" - Thank you, I needed that laugh!

Discover, Buy, and Sell Trending Solana Memecoins Gas-Free

Covenant of circumcision ≠ the covenant of grace

There's no infant baptism in Genesis 17. The amount of eisegesis and special pleading to uphold covenant baptism is astounding. Just admit that you don't really believe in Sola Scriptura.

You would think Paul, or Peter, or James, or Barnabas would’ve simply pointed out that baptism replaced circumcision at the Council of Jerusalem — which was convened entirely because the question of if Gentiles should be circumcised — wouldn’t you? Should’ve been a slam dunk, no?

It's the opposite situation - clearly they needed to speak out against infant baptism if it weren't permitted because the Jewish believers had been conditioned to circumcize their infants on the 8th day, and the Bible clearly links circumcision to baptism when describing the cross (Col 2:11-12). So if infant baptism were not intended, the Apostles would certainly have spoken out about it.

Every time I listen to Jonny Gibson a smile appears on my face. 😃

Wow this is amazing

If God commands it, does that mean baptists are in grave sin?

Excellent! I'm always amazed at how many of us are former Baptists.

Oh I totally know why, the thing I don't understand is why most aren't consistent and give them communion. Infants during passover partook in that blessing after all 🤔

1 Corinthians 11 - communion requires self-examination.